If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Reasons The Book(s) of Enoch wasn't/shouldn't be accepted as inspired canon.

Historical and Internal Inconsistencies

1) It is impossible to determine if Enoch, who lived close to 6,000 years ago, actually wrote the books, or that it was a much later false writer, a Pseudo Enoch, writing under the name of Enoch. If this were the true Enoch, his writings would pre-date Moses' Torah and Job's book by possibly 2000-3000 years, and would have been close to 1,000 years old when Noah carried it on the Ark to preserve it from the Great Flood.

However, most scholars agree that the earliest date of the earliest parts of Enoch is no earlier than 300 B.C....leaving a supposed undocumented of up towards 2,500 years where there is no historical account of the existence of this supposed book written by the original Enoch.

In comparison, the gap between when Moses lived, however, and the first known reference to the Torah is only about 300 years.

2) It was never canonized by the Jews into the Tanakh. (The O.T.)

3) While it was known by many early Christians, and considered by some, it was rejected by most. Of the pre-Nicene church fathers, only Tertullian considered it. Of the post-Nicene fathers, only Augustine considered it, but had concerns of parts of it.

4) The RCC/EO churches both before and after their split; and even the early English Bibles and first 1611 KJV bibles who did include additional 'Apocryphal books' as historical writings in their Bibles, never included the BOE.

5) The earliest full copy of the BOE is dated to the 18th century A.D.....nearly 8,000 years after the patriarch Enoch supposedly wrote the BOE. Fragments have been found dated to the 1st century B.C. in the Quram caves, but those fragments weren't complete book(s), only about 6 verses out of 2 chapters....whereas the full modern-day BOE has 108 chapters. The Jude and Peter quotations, supposedly from Enoch, are not found in any early Enoch manuscripts; not until the 18th century A.D. version arose do they appear.

6) If it was truly written by Enoch the patriarch, it would predate the rest of the Tanakh (O.T.) by thousands of years....yet not one O.T. writer mentions this book, or mentions any writings from Enoch to be in existance. The Book of Enoch was missing from human reference for thousands and thousands of years....yet Isaiah tells us in 40:8 that "God's Word do not fade away". Enoch took a very, very long vacation if it was truly written pre-Flood. Then, to compound things, when it did should up circa 200 B.C., it disappeared again for roughly 1,500 more years. It 'faded away' twice!!

7) Enoch chapter 6 lists 19 angels by name, as the ones who lead the rebellion and the fall of man. Enoch chapter 69 lists 21 angels by name, as the ones who lead the rebellion and the fall of man --- and most of the ones listed are inconsistent and completely different than what was given in chapter 6.

8) Enoch chapter 7 teaches that the giants, who were created by Angels mating with humans, were 450 feet tall! That's as tall as the Washington monument, and over half the length of the titanic. That's 10 times taller than the largest known dinosaur skeleton ever found. How could human women birth creatures of this size?

9) Enoch chapter 71 teaches that the Sun revolves around the Earth, and that the Sun and the moon are the same size, and that the sun shines only 7 times brighter than the moon!

Reasons The Book(s) of Enoch wasn't/shouldn't be accepted as inspired canon.Biblical Contradictions

Now for the really important reasons....where the rubber meets the road!

1) Enoch 107 claims that Enoch was present with Lamach when Noah was born, and that Enoch named Noah.

Yet the bible tells us that Enoch was born 622 years after creation, and that all the days of Enoch were 365, making him leave the earth (either death or divine assumption) 69 years BEFORE Noah was born.

Biblical Contradiction #1; and sufficient evidence to dismiss the BOE as being inspired canon.

2) Enoch chapter 6 has angels marrying human women.

Yet the bible in Matthew 22, tells us that angels do not marry.

Biblical Contradiction #2.

3) Enoch chapters 8-10 teach that sin was passed to man to man via their procreation with angels and their genetic lineage. To remain pure and sin free, Lamech, (Noah's father), was taught to hide himself so he would allow sin to enter him by breeding with an angel.

Yet the bible tells us that sin isn't genetic, but rather comes from breaking God's law, and is a matter of the heart; not the genetic heritage.

Biblical Contradiction #3.

4) The book of Enoch teaches that the realm of the dead is divided into 4 areas, Righteous Martyrs, Righteous non-Martyrs, Unrighteous who didn't suffer the consequences for their sin, and Unrighteous who did suffer the consequences for their sin. It also teaches that the 4th group will not be judged, slain, or raised on Judgment Day.

Yet the bible only teaches the realm of the dead containing the faithful and the unfaithful, and that all will be raised and judged; with the righteous inheriting Eternal Life, and all the unrighteous being judged and condemned to the eternal Lake of Fire.

Biblical Contradiction #4.

5) In chapter 40 of the BOE, it teaches that an angel named Phanuel is "who is set over the repentance unto hope of those who inherit eternal life".

However, the Bible tells us that Jesus Christ alone, is the mediator between God and man, and that repentence through Him alone; not any angel, is how man may inherit eternal life.

Biblical Contradiction #5.

6) Enoch chapter 69 teaches that two angels named Jeqon and Gadreel were responsible for the fall of the other angels (Jaqon) and for leading Eve astray and into sin (Gadreel) .

The bible however, teaches in Genesis 3, 2 Corinthians 11, and Revelation chapter 12, that it was the serpent named Satan, who was responsible for the angels falling, and who lead Eve astray.

Biblical Contradiction #6.

7) In Enoch chapter 22, it teaches that there are 10 heavens.

However, in the Bible, (Hosea 2, Job 9:8-9, Psa 11:4)), it teaches that there are only 3 heavens.

Biblical Contradiction #7.

8) In Enoch chapter 10, it teaches that after the flood, men will live to the ages of 500.

However, in the Bible, Genesis 6, scripture tells us that the lifespan of man after the flood will be 120 years. How many 500 yr old people have been documented in history since the flood; compare to 120 or less year olds?

Biblical Contradiction #8.

9) In Enoch chapter 10, it also teaches the world was destroyed by the flood because "the earth which the angels have corrupted", and "And the whole earth has been corrupted through the works that were taught by (the angel) Azazel".

Yet the Bible in Genesis 6:4-7 it tells us the world was corrupted by the wickedness of man; not angels nor by an angel named Azazel.

Biblical Contradiction #9.

10) Enoch chapter 14 and 15 tells us that the angels are eternal and uncreated, "The book of the words of righteousness, and of the reprimand of the eternal Watchers" and "you were formerly spiritual, living the eternal life, and immortal for all generations of the world".

Yet the Bible tells us that the angels were created beings, and not eternal.

Psalms 148:2 Praise ye him, all his angels: praise ye him, all his hosts. Let them praise the name of the LORD: for he commanded, and they were created."

Biblical Contradiction #10.

...And that's just after browsing through the BOE for about 2 hours, looking for contradictions it contains with the Bible.

For those who still wonder why it wasn't canonized as inspired, how many more reasons would you need that the 20 listed in the past 2 posts; but Bibilcal conflicts, and internal/external historical conflicts?

I'll end with a word from some true books of inspired canon.

John 18:38 "What is truth?"

Psalms 119:160 "Thy word is true from the beginning: and every one of thy righteous judgments endureth for ever."

John 3:33 "God is true. For he whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God"

I Kings 17:24 "Now by this I know that thou art a man of God, and that the word of the LORD in thy mouth is truth. "

John 17:17 "Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth."

I John 2:26 "These things have I written unto you concerning them that seduce you. But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie"

Book of Enoch

About Book of Enoch. some books said on it that it wide accepted by jews and early christians. How would they know that? do any other books ovbious hertic are accepted in these times? After reading it, I can see why it be rejected only based on how easy it would be for men to make something complte a invention out of supposed facts a sit said, heavy on stars clestic bodies begin so personfiled in partuilcur. at same time, I accept genreal truth of the book from a oirental viewpoint (vaguely sayings) but how much I dont know.

What do you think/know about it?

for record, I accept fallen angels that happened as Jude 2 Peter and Genisus said and more.

and there some bible recorded by Enoch the prophet in New Testament, I remembered Jesus quoted prophet Enoch if that the same name, spoken.

is it rejected based on sayings on stars clestic bodies, or ever truth in it but not divine inspired? or some truth divine inspired but rejected written as whole book with mixture of just history recorded truth?

sometime i think the earilest it claimed the vaguely it can get, bit like Job whose of oirental viewpoint(oldest book) kind of predictable vague by date sometime.

I put together a couple of posts on the BOE last year, and copied them into this thread (looks like they date-sorted to the top)...anyway I thought they'd be beneficial to your OP

Hi David

I never see that title of thread. all very good reasons you gave, now I know better. apart from fallen angels in bible (not height or drespiction numbers names bible hardy mention them anyway doesnt concern really) but that bit I do believe in it literally sayings in bible

Thanks for posting evidence regarding problems with the Book of Enoch. I never knew there were so many contradictions in the Book of Enoch! I've always thought it was just another one of the lost books that should have been included in the Bible.

About Book of Enoch. some books said on it that it wide accepted by jews and early christians. How would they know that?

Jude quotes the book of Enoch, twice. This does not imply that Enoch is inspired, but it does imply that the people who read Jude were very familiar with the book of Enoch. For instance, if I wrote that someone "went down the rabbit hole", modern readers would recognize the allusion to Alice in Wonderland and make inferences on what I wrote based on that knowledge.

I was wondering what verse in that chapter of Enoch that you read says that the sun and moon are the same size? and the sun revolves around the earth? Could you quote that verse for me, please?

Looks like a typo on the chapter...here is the part where Enoch says the Sun and Moon are the same size....from chapter 71 not 48.

Enoch 71:45-47 "This is the great everlasting luminary, that which he names the sun for ever and ever. This also is that which goes forth a great luminary, and which is named after its peculiar kind, as God commanded. And thus it goes in and out, neither slackening nor resting; but running on in its chariot by day and by night. It shines with a seventh portion of light from the moon; but the dimensions of both are equal."

Yes, thanks. The version I have in my computer is different than the one I have in a printed book (similar but different). The thing about a book is I read that so long ago and did not remember it. Probably I would have taken it to mean the same angular size from earth's vantage point, which they are.

As for the sun going around the earth, I'm taking that to be the part where Enoch mentions a chariot?

Maybe they thought that, or again, maybe just the colloquial used in observation.

King David said of the sun,

Which is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, and rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race.

And again in Joshua,

Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon.
And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies.

Atheists for years misquote passages like this when it does not really say the sun goes around the earth, but even today we talk about the sun rising or setting.

The thing with Enoch, is that there are more than one book, and conflicting versions...it's not as though there is one 'autograph' or baseline manuscript that is the BOE. Parts are found mostly in Ethiopian, and to a lesser degree in Aramaic, Greek, and Latin (not Hebrew though....not surprisingly).

Typically 5 and sometimes 6 sub-books are combined to comprise the BOE. All of them with their problems of confliction to the Holy Scriptures as found in primarily in Hebrew.

Re: Book of Enoch

I own two diff. copies of the book.
I never thought I would ever say this but: it was not canonized for good reasons.

I felt the same about the apocryphal writings in the Septuagint too, but I understand now why they were not canonized also.

Meaning I do not like for men that I never knew deciding what is good or profitable for me and my fellows to read or even consider.

I still do not think there is anything wrong with having or even referring to those books, I just do not keep them on the same spiritual shelf as I do with scripture and new testament writings anymore.

Re: Book of Enoch

Originally Posted by TKevin

Hey David, why is the name Azazel mentioned in yom kippur or the day of atonement in the Torah? Your bible says scapegoat, and the reason for this is because of him being the scapegoat in yom kippur his name became synonyms with scapegoat and that is what satan used to hide this and to hide what happened a long time ago. Also the bible changes the word Raphaim to wicked to hide it also. Since you say the book of enoch is full of errors, would you like me to show you the errors in the bible? and does that mean the bible is wrong?

Since you seem to think the bible is full of errors and has been deceictfully manipulated and changed to carry lies and to hide the truth, I think I'll pass on engaging you on your query. I stand firm on accepting the bible as holy inspired writ, and rejecting the books of enoch as writings that conflict with the holy scriptures, therefore uninspired; which doesn't give us much common ground.

I suggest the reader who is interested in the topic of the books of Enoch to read them, and to mark the inconsistencies and contrandicitions that they find within it with a highlighter, then decide if those inconsisencies merit it's inclusion as inspired holy writ, or demand their rejection, as nearly all Christians throughout history have done concluded.

Re: Book of Enoch

Just a point of curiosity, David. I agree with your assessment of Enoch.
You said

Yet the Bible tells us that the angels were created beings, and not eternal.

and you gave Psalms 148:2 as your proof.Psalms 148:2 Praise ye him, all his angels: praise ye him, all his hosts. Let them praise the name of the LORD: for he commanded, and they were created."
My question, You don't believe angels are eternal? And since this verse you provided does not say anything about their being eternal, do you have another verse that does?
I always thought/assumed that they were eternal beings, just as we are (eternal future, but not eternal past).

Re: Book of Enoch

Originally Posted by Kahtar

Just a point of curiosity, David. I agree with your assessment of Enoch.
You said
and you gave Psalms 148:2 as your proof.Psalms 148:2 Praise ye him, all his angels: praise ye him, all his hosts. Let them praise the name of the LORD: for he commanded, and they were created."
My question, You don't believe angels are eternal? And since this verse you provided does not say anything about their being eternal, do you have another verse that does?
I always thought/assumed that they were eternal beings, just as we are (eternal future, but not eternal past).

I'm pretty sure what he meant is that they were created and will live for eternity, but they haven't always existed like God has.